[Advaita-l] Debunking Drishti-Srishti Vada and Eka Jiva Vada - part 1

Aditya Kumar kumaraditya22 at yahoo.com
Wed Jul 26 14:07:53 EDT 2017

Incorrect. The waking and dream are both sublated by each other. There is no dream in waking but no waking in dream either. This is elaborately discussed in VP of GK. A : I think Gaudapada too says something to that effect : Dream objects are useless in waking state and waking state objects are useless in dreams. However, the above reasoning is given by Shankara himself in BSB questioning the Buddhists. All said and done, I'd like to point out few more reasons why Shankara's argument holds good. (1) Let us not consider single instances of dream/awake/deep sleep. Lets assume two consecutive days. In that case, while waking state remains same, the dream world does not. (2) Further, we infer the unreality of dreams from the vantage of waking state and not otherwise. (3) One more problem is that, if both waking and dream states are said to be equal, a jivanmukta should at the very instant of realization should disappear. Because as per DSV, jiva projects the world, so prapancha upashamana should happen after jivanmukti. But such a thing is not observed anywhere. (4) If there is no difference between waking and dream, it has to be explained without the help of paramartha. If we are taking paramartha reference, then, it is useless exercise as vyavahara too is resolved in it. So if at all we insist on only 2 levels, it should be vyavharika.

As pointed out before, Gaudapada is only talking about the commonality between dream and waking state is perception(S-O, duality) alone, wrt Paramartha of course. No where does he say both are of the same status.  
Please refer GK Agama prakarana verse 7; He says : Some of those who contemplate the process of creation regard it as the manifestation of God’s powers; others imagine creation to be like dreams and illusions. 
​Congratulations​ ​for quoting ​the verse I pointed to you long back in this thread by the word सृष्टिपराः which Subbuji quoted later as सृष्टिचिन्तकाः। Please understand that this dream being talked about is not the same as the dream that is being talked of by DSV. The dream is used in the entire GK, which is the DSV prakriyA, why would it be rejected here? It is not. The dream that SDV followers know of before understanding DSV is rejected. ​The last line of Anandagiri Tika may help understand if its not clear:​ ​जाग्रद्गतानाम् ​अर्थानाम् ​एव ​स्वप्ने​ ​प्रथानात् तस्य  सत्यत्वं मायायाश्च मण्यादिलक्षणायाः सत्यत्वाङ्गीकाराद् अनयोः विकल्पयोः सिद्धान्ताद् वैषम्यम् उन्नेयम्। The dream is thought of by SDV and most others who know neither SDV ​n​or DSV​ ​that dream is that which follows waking​, meaning the dream objects are those which are seen in waking. Then again, dvaitins take this dream state as reality. These are the kinds of dreams refuted in 2nd and 4th prakaraNas. ​
Under 1.16 then Bhashyakara confirms that both states of waking and dream are only a dream so: योऽयं संसारी जीवः, सः उभयलक्षणेन तत्त्वाप्रतिबोधरूपेण बीजात्मना, अन्यथाग्रहणलक्षणेन ... इत्येवंप्रकारान्स्वप्नान् स्थानद्वयेऽपि पश्यन्सुप्तः​। One who is this bound individual, he is asleep seeing dreams even in both [waking and dream] states in such ways as ...​ ​characterised by ​the seed in the form of ​miscomprehension of reality.​
A : Again, Both refs are pointing towards paramartha. 
(​Moderators, Apologies for more mails today)​​.
A : Me too.


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list